Re: [PATCH] vfs: dont chain pipe/anon/socket on superblock s_inodes list
flat view
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Date: 2011-07-26 09:04:09
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, lkml
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:21:06AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
Well, not 'last' contention point, as we still hit remove_inode_hash(),
There should be no ned to put pipe or anon inodes on the inode hash. Probably sockets don't need it either, but I'd need to look at it in detail.
inode_wb_list_del()
The should never be on the wb list either, doing an unlocked check for actually beeing on the list before taking the lock should help you.
inode_lru_list_del(),
No real need to keep inodes in the LRU if we only allocate them using new_inode but never look them up either. You might want to try setting .drop_inode to generic_delete_inode for these.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+struct inode *__new_inode(struct super_block *sb) +{ + struct inode *inode = alloc_inode(sb); + + if (inode) { + spin_lock(&inode->i_lock); + inode->i_state = 0; + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock); + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&inode->i_sb_list); + } + return inode; +}
This needs a much better name like new_inode_pseudo, and a kerneldoc comment explaining when it is safe to use, and the consequences, which appear to me: - fs may never be unmount - quotas can't work on the filesystem - writeback can't work on the filesystem
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -814,13 +829,9 @@ struct inode *new_inode(struct super_block *sb) spin_lock_prefetch(&inode_sb_list_lock); - inode = alloc_inode(sb); - if (inode) { - spin_lock(&inode->i_lock); - inode->i_state = 0; - spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock); - inode_sb_list_add(inode); - } + inode = __new_inode(sb); + if (inode) + inode_sb_list_add(inode);
bad indentation.